Views in a component.model

[Jorge.Rivas]

Hi everyone!

 

We are trying to describe one of our systems with IP-XACT 2014. This system has two implementations, RTL and TLM, each with a different set of ports.

 

- Is it possible to describe both RTL and TLM within the same component.model, using two different views? If so, how? There is only one "model" element per component, and one "ports" element per model, even though it is possible to have more than one view. What is the motivation to have more than one view?

- If it is not possible, what would be the suggested method?

 

Thanks for your help,

 

Kind regards,

Jorge

[kock]

Hello Jorge,

 

Yes it is possible to describe RTL and TLM within the same component using two different views. The motivation to have more than one view is that you can describe multiple implementations of an IP in the same IP-XACT component.

 

The way to indicate if a port is present is a particular view is to use the wireTypeDefs (for wire ports) and transTypeDefs (for transactional ports). Each wireTypeDef and each transTypeDef contains zero or more viewRef elements. If there are zero viewRef elements then the type applies to all views (implying that the port is present is all views). If there are one or more viewRef elements then the type applies only to the views specified by the viewRef elements (implying that the port is not present in the views that are not specified). If a port does not have wireTypeDefs or transTypeDefs then the default type applies to all views (implying that the port is present in all views).

 

I must admit that this is not very well described in the IEEE 1685-2014 document in Sections 6.12.9 and 6.12.19.

 

Best regards,

Erwin

[Khushi]

Hi Erwin

If I am correct, even in 1685-2009 we can describe RTL and TLM within the same component using two different views. Am I correct ?

I have a scenario where I have an RTL IP with an optional port which is only present in one view(e.g. simulation view). can I use two view in such case and use viewnameref with that optional port ? Why I need to explicitly specify the typeName with wireTypeDef. In this specific case I want to use native types even when I have optional ports. Is it intentional to have typename mandatory ?

How to manage two different businterfaces then ? I have an AHB bus in RTL and TLM2 bus in TLM. Do I need to describe both businterfaces in IP-Xact ?

Thanks

Khushi

[kock]

Hi Kushi,

Sorry for my late reply. Support for RTL and TLM views in the same component is limited in 1685-2009. It only works if the RTL and TLM views have the same ports, e.g. in case of a signal-level TLM view. If you have a transactional port in the TLM view then there is no way to handle that port in the RTL view. The 1685-2014 version enables you to hide that transactional port in the RTL view and replace it by signal-level ports. Also in 1685-2009, each bus interface can have only one set of port maps. In 1685-2014, a bus interface can have port maps for an RTL view and port maps for a TLM view. The abstraction type is view specific. However, you can only have one bus type per bus interface. Hence, if you have an AHB bus type, you need to have AHB_rtl and AHB_tlm abstraction types as different representations of the same bus.

Best regards,
Erwin